Investing in Better Outcomes: The Delaware Early Childhood Longitudinal Study

1. Investing in Better Outcomes:The Delaware Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Prepared for the Delaware Interagency Resource Management Committee Michael Gamel-McCormick, Director Deborah Amsden, Coordinator Center for Disabilities Studies College of Human Services, Education, and Public Policy University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716 (302) 831-6974 (voice), (302) 831-4690 (FAX), (302) 831-4689 (TTD), www.udel.edu/cds (web site)

2. Longitudinal study of kindergarteners entered school in the 1997-98 school year Purpose: To determine the impact of pre-K services for students with disabilities living in poverty The Study

3. The Study • Purpose • Funds going into pre-kindergarten services were producing positive outcomes • Impetus • Department Secretary wanted to know if pre-kindergarten would impact 3rd grade test results • Request came at a time of major test and proposed standards reform

4. 717 entered kindergarten during 1997-98 217 with active IEPs 250 living in poverty 250 from the general population The Sample

5. Pre-k service records were reviewed to determine if students had received pre-k intervention in: Head Start Early Childhood Assistance Programs Birth to Three services (Part C of IDEA) Preschool special education Students Having Received Pre-K Services

6. Methods • Retrospective analysis • Comparison groups • Record review • State test review • Originally at 3rd • Now up to 5th • Planned at 8th

7. Students’ family backgrounds, including: Family form number of siblings, parents, extended family members in the household Parents’/guardians’ education Parents’/guardians’ employment Services students received including: Special education services Extended school day Extended school year K-3(4) early intervention Students’ behavior Students’ grades Students’ 3rd grade DSTP results Variables Tracked

8. Comparison Groups • In order to determine the impact of pre-kindergarten services, comparison groups needed to be created from the sample • Two groups were created: • Students who were living in poverty who did not receive ECAP or Head Start services • Students who did not have their disabilities identified until kindergarten, 1st, or 2nd grade

9. Comparison Groups

10. RESULTS

11. Students with Disabilities • Students receiving preschool special education services had significantly higher 3rd grade DSTP scores than those students not identified with disabilities until K, 1, or 2 • 65.2% met or exceeded the reading standard (vs. 33.3%) • 55.6% met or exceeded the math standard (vs. 33.4%)

12. Comparative 3rd Grade DSTP Results for Students Living in Poverty

13. Comparative 5TH Grade DSTP Results for Students with Disabilities Percentage of Students with IEPs Meeting or Exceeding Fifth Grade Standards for Reading, Mathematics, and Writing—March 2003

14. Students with Disabilities (cont.) • Significantly more students receiving preschool special education services had satisfactory or higher 3rd grade academic grades in language arts, math, and listening skills than students not identified with disabilities until K, 1, or 2 (73% vs. 59%) • Students receiving preschool special education services had a grade retention rate of 5.56 per 100 students compared to 26.1 per 100 students for students not identified with disabilities until K, 1, or2

15. Students Living in Poverty • Students receiving Early Childhood Assistance Program or Head Start services had significantly higher 3rd grade DSTP scores than those students living in poverty who did not receive pre-K services • 69.1% met or exceeded the reading standard (vs. 48.7%) • 61.9% met or exceeded the math standard (vs. 45.8%)

16. Comparative 3rd Grade DSTP Results for Students Living in Poverty

17. Comparative 5TH Grade DSTP Results for Students Living in Poverty Percentage of Students Living in Poverty Meeting or Exceeding Fifth Grade Standards for Reading, Mathematics, and Writing—March 2003

18. Students Living in Poverty (cont.) • Significantly more students receiving ECAP or Head Start services had satisfactory or higher 3rd grade academic grades in language arts, math, and listening skills than students not receiving those services (83% vs. 71%) • Students receiving ECAP or Head Start services had a grade retention rate of 6.67 per 100 students compared to 16.5 per 100 students for students living in poverty who did not have ECAP or Head Start services

19. Conclusions • Preschool special education services: • Have a significant impact on children’s academic performanceand • can address the achievement gap for students with disabilities • Positive outcomes are evident for students identified PRIOR to their entry into kindergarten and receive services during the preschool years

20. Conclusions (continued) • Early Childhood Assistance Program and Head Start services have a significant impact: • on children’s academic performance and • can address the achievement gap for students living in poverty • if students receive those services when they are 3 and 4 years of age

21. Lessons Learned • Tracking of students difficult • Accessing State/DOE records • Accessing school district records • Incomplete student records • Specifying services received across communities • Reliability of family background information • Comparison of grades across districts difficult as there is no standard for state

22. Lessons Learned • Untended Outcomes • Impact of family crisis therapist on child outcomes • Retention rate of students